See also: IRC log
<kaz> scribenick: DarkoAnicic
Sebastian: there is a wiki page
with minuts from F2F meeting:
https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Breakout_topics_27-02-2016_28-02-2016#TD_Breakout_2_.2827-02-2016_13-16:00pm.29
... current status presented, slides can be found here:
https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/images/a/a1/W3C_WoT_TD_Breakouts_Nice.pdf
Sebastian: presents a short recap from the Plugfest
Sebastian: ThingWeb Repository
was introduced by Plugfest
... stores TDs from all demos, it can be queried, updated
etc.
... T2T introduction has been demonstrated (temperature sensor
form France interacts with an aircondition device from
Japan)
... various demonstrations were presented, with more TDs than
in Sapporo. Various supported protocols, e.g., HTTP, CoAP,
MQTT, WS
... feedback from Pkugfest: change of IP address should be kept
up to date in the Thing's TD.
... there was a question about the support for security in
TD
... further on, binding to the protocols. We add a property
name to the IP addtress (uri). We could work on a better prosal
here, e.g., HATEOAS
... how to nest properties, how to handle absolute links
(further open questions in the scope of TD-TF)
... TD provides a basic semantic info, but the real semantics
can be captured in higher-level vocabularies, ontologies etc.
How to integrate and utilize them?
... TechLandscape was a topic too
https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/TF-TD/Technology%20Landscape/TechLandscape.md
Sebastian: we refined the topics and assigned names of people who are willing to contribute
Mohammed_(Orange): I can contribute to the TechLandscape
Michael: I can work on the TechLandscape too
<kaz> fyi. TF-AP Tech Landscape
Johannes: could Mohammed and Michale contribute to the API-related TechLandscape
Victor: Schema.org is not tightly related to TD
Michale: agree, but can serve as an example of a shared vocabulary used on the Web, and perheps we could do similar things related to WoT
Sebastian: for further propsoals on the TechLandscape, please propose via email
Sebastian: a joint session with DI-TF
minutes available: https://www.w3.org/2016/01/27-wot-td-minutes.html
<inserted> and https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Breakout_topics_27-02-2016_28-02-2016#TD_Breakout_2_.2827-02-2016_13-16:00pm.29
Sebastian: there was a discussion
about HATEOAS
... a joint TD - SP session
... whether and how to put security related information in
TD
... outcome: let us create examples of TDs with security
related information, e.g., relaying on JSON Web token
Sebastian: Darko presented an
example how to extend a TD (for a brightness sensor used in the
Plugfest) with further contextual infomration (e.g., SSN
ontology)
... discussion was whether we could extend vocabulary in
TD-TF
e.g., horizontal vocabular, i.e., not domain dependent. For example, for "on" and "off"
Sebastian: presents outcome of the discussion on what is in the scope of the future WG w.r.t TD-TF
Darko: regarding a horizontal vocabulary we could try to propose one and use it during our Plugfests, and if it turns to be useful and practical, then it could be a subject of the group's work
Sebastian: no new serialization format should be proposaed by us, i.e., we should relay on the existing ones
Johannes: system internal and generation of TD in the scope of AP-TF
Frank: the meeting was very
productive
... we cannot propose only one serialization format, the
standard needs to be opened for various fomrats
Matthias: content negotiation mechanism should be used
Johannes: for existing APIs the question is whether I will be able to create a TD - is this in the scope of the group's work?
Matthias: for legacy systems, a gateway can be used
Sebastian: if one creates an API
that is compliant with guidelines from us (API-TF), then there
should be no problem. Exisitng systems that do not relay on
such guidelines, can use gateways. However this is out of scope
of the group's work.
... you can still comment on subjects that are in/out of scope
via emails
... first to address is the subject on protocol bindings and
planning for the next Plugfest
Mohammed: what is the conclusion on the presentation about oneM2M
Sebastian: it was a nice
overview, the presented ontology is very interesting, although
quite big
... could be a good input for a colaboration with us
Johannes: possible colaboration on the level of abstraction between oneM2M and the API work, but oneM2M activities are more related the TD-TF
Michael: IoT semantic
interopearbility workshop will be held in March in Silicon
Valley. Everyone invited, please send a position paper.
... it would be valuable to have a position of oneM2M at the
workshop
Sebastian: please work on the TechLandscape, see you in 2 weekes.